For what reason do the park service want to install home amenities in the parks?
People go to the parks to get away from home and there everyday habits. The only
thing the parks need is trash cans for those who litter and can't take there
trash with them.

Privatizing these parks and fees to enter them is
why I have stopped visiting them. The parks are getting too much development and
commercialism in them, leave them alone and pristine. The park service is there
to patrol the parks for eco-violations, law enforcement, and help those in them.
They don't need souvenir shops or restaurants in them or camping facilities.
Force the visitors to bring their needs and take their trash with them.

Leave the parks undeveloped and stop with this mentality to make them a home
like environment and do not privatize the parks. It will double the cost to
enter and keep more people away.

The issue is not parks. The solution is to have public programs ( medicade, care
for disabled, elderly, young children) put on the sholders that can carry it
best. Namely the churches. Our state is an embarresment to its heritage!

...give us a list of the parks that are being considered.Also, why would
they consider cutting some parks and in the same breath talk about adding
internet hookups in others.Let the paople that can't live without the internet
stay home.

While I do not necessarily disagree with Ellis Ivory's assumption that shutting
state parks leads to losses in tourism revenues, I would like some data to back
it up. I know of some state parks that are visited by tourists from outside of
the State and others that seem to be visited mainly by locals. Visits by
locals, in many cases, brings in little by way of hotel, food establishment, and
other revenues.

Opposed! Visit Utah parks in the Summer and Spring and see how heavily they are
used. Utah is a big-family state and it is apparent in the park systems.
Examine the limits of privatizing. Compare the offerings of public and private
parks before taking that giant step. Privatizing, I think, will rob park
visitors of a "nature" experience. Privatize buildings and services in towns
and cities where it probably should be done but don't dole out nature to
citizens by turning the remaining natural enclaves into profit generators.

I agree with overspending. Keep the parks primitive, free of stores, internet
connections, and other such things. Have a few signs and/or displays in the
parking area to give a brief overview of the historical or natural aspects of
the park. Have public restrooms in the parking area but not elsewhere. Have
ramps and paved paths in the vicinity of the parking area and dirt, unmaintained
paths elsewhere. Charge reasonable fees to help offset the tax dollars needed to
pay for the minimum maintenance of the parks. Use tax dollars to list the parks
in registries, but don't spend tax dollars to entice people to come to the
parks. Let people come to the parks who are willing to endure the primitive
nature of the parks, and let people who what more conveniences stay away. The
parks should be available to all, but the parks shouldn't try to satisfy the
needs of all. Let locals who are interested in a particular park form non-profit
volunteer groups to help staff and maintain particular parks.

This is what Bush & Cheney tried to do to our national parks. Privatization is
one more way to deprive common Americans of one of the best parts of our
American way of life and pour more dollars into the pockets of Republicans in
big business. Can you imagine the Haliburton Nature Trail around Old Faithful
or having Kodachrome Basin run by Chevron?

There is virtually no
place left in Texas for Texans to go enjoy time with nature, because during the
years Bush was governor down there, most of Texas was "privatized" and the new
owners doubled or tripled fees for entrance and camping.

We need to understand that state parks preserve our heritage, some wilderness,
and our history. This is not something which should be privatized. I have no
objection to a small fee, or for a tax which might go to support these parks.

The ideology that pivate can do better than public has reached it's peak of
stupidity. Making profits should never be the purpose of state park and
privatization is not always the solution to all our financial problems. In
today's economy many private companies are going bankrupt. A company will
always look at maximizing its's profit--not breaking even! If revenue is not in,
park maintenance will most likely be cut, parts of the parks closed, safety
trimmed ect...Not going in the right direction...

The 45 day legislative session can't end too soon. The fact that this idea and
many of the other cuts being proposed (as well as the wasteful spending of
taxpayer dollars on likely constitutional challenges to "message" bills) is
considered less radical than increasing revenue is just plain nuts!

Cut the number of legislators and the number of days in the legislative session
if you want to save some money. We need LESS GOVERNMENT!!! Then stop with the
"message bills" and all the litigation that we'll spend in the courts. How about
that?

The parks were set aside for the people of a state or this nation to enjoy.
Encouraging those who would "get gain" by limiting access to God's pure creation
to only those who could pay would be a huge mistake. How much more of our souls
are we willing to sell for money?

Let the parks remain (or revert to
the) wild, if it comes to that. As many above have said, there would probably be
enough volunteer work to handle the bare necessities.